guy5927

Watch out with the 250 W ...

Wings ARE known to fold on the PZ warbirds under so much power ...

Bonefisher

Guy, thanks for the warning... I have been careful so far... but waiting to get back up for a full test this weekend....

I think the 250watt may be high... but I am going to take it easy on the frame for now....

Airbourne in Japan

My Feedback: (3)

hi, i have a fw190 and i have a problem with the gearbox being tight when i put the motor in. without the motor pinion the gearbox and propshaft spin freely. i've got a motor pinion from the p51, but i believe they are the same. i tried to fly it with a warp 4 turn motor and it wouln't fly. i put a new motor pinion and a warp 3 turn in and it's still tight, but i haven't tried flying it yet. does anyone else have this problem. i had the p51 and it flew ok with the warp 4 turn and the gearbox was nice and loose, but personally i didn't like the p51 as it was always spinning and then the wing started folding. however i really like the aerobird and f27.

WRXpilot

Success finally! (mostly)

Today I had two brief flights without serious incident. The only damage was some paint on the bottom of the cowl that rubbed off in the tall grass.

It flies with authority, really cuts through the air. I got the hang of 4 channel glow planes before I took a few years' break from R/C and I thought 3-channel electrics would be a breeze coming back, but it's actually quite a handful for me right now. The Super Cub would've been much more relaxing. A warbird just gets my blood going so much better though.

Now for the "mostly"; adding to the anxiety of flying this thing is that it seems to be glitching a bit. The motor stutters/skips every once and a while, and the plane will occasionally twitch and roll to the right a bit.

It's a bit disconcerting, and I haven't been able to isolate the source. I guess it could be interference, but I wouldn't expect such consistent (specific) glitching if it was random interference; the elevator is rock solid, no glitching at all. How likely is it that a faulty receiver/ESC would give me these problems?

drebins2003

hay bone its good that uv put the aon in but realy is it that easy to do??? just fit str8 in no messing with the eletrics or anything just sounds to good to be true .

Bonefisher

Drebins, sorry all if I did not relay it all out... the AON does drop right in with the stock pinion, but I am flying the plane with a SPECKTRUM 6 controller, Castle 35ESC, Thunder Power Lipo 3C2100, and the Spektrum receiver... this is a great set-up.... allows mix and match of other things...

I fly my Styker, P47, FW190, all on the same controller... and the programability is great.....

Hope this makes sense...

drebins2003

hay bone but is it possoble to do this with standard set up?????????just fit the aon and lipos and away u go???

Bonefisher

drebins,

Unfort you cannot just drop in a brushless motor with the lipo.... you need an brushless capable electonic speed control...

There is a guy who sells one that will work the parkzone stuff for around $25... then you would be good to go....

Are you flying lipos now? If not, maybe just the jump up to LIPO may be enough.... the only reason I went with the brushless is I was already converting the FW190 to the new controller so I could fly all my planes on one radio....

I flew the FW190 on the stock gear with lipo for some time and LOVED it... just the jump from stock to LIPO battery made all the difference.

I plan on flying the brushless set-up again tomorrow and will let you know how it goes.

drebins2003

just useing stock at the mo but wnna go brushless make ir faster i surpose lots more fun???but just upgradeing to lipos dose that make a vast inprovement and is it noticable or not???and if going fluing shoot some vid and get it on ere wanna c how much more fun it is??

Bonefisher

Lipo makes a very noticeable difference....

Unfort, the maiden #2 flight did not go as planned.... launched by hand, and though I had set the CG right on the money between the two boxes on the wing, she flew very tail down, got up to about 100 feet, tipped over nose down.... tried to add power to pull out, and drove her STRAIGHT into the ground at 30 mph....

No Lipo damage, battery ok, internal stucture and gearbox is toast... along with cowling...

Came home... replaced the internal structure (at $1.99 a piece, best deal around)... replaced the gear box... AON motor is still 100%!.... swithched out the electronics, just need a new cowling and I can try again... I am DEF going to fly with the extra weight up front (prop weight)....

Anyone else have experience where she is tail heavy even when centered on the boxes??

gunracer

she definitelt flys better a little nose heavy...i added 2.5 oz of lead in the cowl....

Bonefisher

Gr,

Def will put some weight in the nose... between the AON and the LIPO, I figure i have dropped 2 - 3 oz off the nose.... serves me right for not going with my gut on this one.

These are some photos of the install with the Castle 35 on the side and rec below the pan....

I am going to wait for the new cowl... drop 1.5 oz of lead in the nose, and try again.

Venom_14

WRXpilot,

I use to have the same problem. I was flying in a field near my house, its perfect for PZ warbirds, because it is massive. Anway, i was flying it in a circuit getting used to the controls when i heard my engine stutter, i thought nothing of it as it was the first time it done it in two flights. But when i brought it around again, it stuttered, and quit. The plane started going down and went into the crops.
After succesfully finding it i found there was no damage becuase it was softened by the crops as it came down, and i used up what was left of the battery walking back to the car by putting the throttle up. I there was no problem with the motor and it didnt stutter, i didnt know what was wrong.

On the way back to my house i saw a radio mast or somthing like that, i had nerver seen it before and thought that was the problem, so next time i flew, i moved down the field and everything went somthly. so it must have been that,


Try moving down the field, if you can, can you see any masts of some kind near you?

drebins2003

well at least iv learnt something if i go bushless with lipos make sure i weight the nose or im going to crash and burn

MAX HEADSPEED

I've read somewhere in this or another site from a contributer the a tail heavy plane will fly but not well and not for long. If you look at what it takes for this B1-RD to fly well it must be balanced. Usually at some point forward of the center point of max lift on the wing.
On this plane, the cg is checked with the B1-RD inverted and supported on a specific location as described in the manual. You can get a copy on-line at the distributer's web site.
HOPE this helps ya kee'em fly=in

Bonefisher

Max... I balanced the plane dead-on to the manual... which is the scary part.... I think the CG is about 1" forward of the book.... at least in my world... I will try again and let all know.

sniper1

Hi 190 fans!

Thought id post an old video of my friend learning to fly his focke wulf. This is his second flight ever! This is a tricky plane to fly for new pilots so despite a heavy landing, brought it back in one piece and no battle damage. He was awarded the iron cross second class for this gallant mission! It is completely stock and gets 6 mins flight time. He has now switched to lipos and the performance is great! After forgetting to add more weight in the nose to compensate for the light weight lipo, his first flight was a short roller coaster ride before a big tree helped him bring it back to earth! I think most people agree the 190 is a little tail heavy stock, so dont forget to add weight in the nose when switching to lipos!! It now flys great and mixes it up with my mustang, when the English weather allows. Have any of you guys painted a new color scheme on your 190, if so id really like to see some pictures. There are so many great camouflage variations for the 190 to personalize your bird. Go for it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIq-0zFQqEc

29904

Guys, I don't understand why everyone is adding the weighted nose spinner to move the CG further forward. We are flying three different PZ 190s with stock motors and 2,100 lipo batteries and no additional nose weight and they fly great. The stall is very gentle and easy to recover. With this configuration you must limit the elevator throw to a minimum.

This is a great plane if you buy the replacement airframe and install your own radio and fly it with a 2,100 lipo battery.

Parkzone guys, how about making a TA 152 out of your 190? It would only take a redesigned nose, extended fuselage and longer wing span.

It is a great airplane and what I really like is the reasonably priced replacement parts.

Larry from Va.

drebins2003

hay bone how u getting on with ur 190 m8 is it all fixed????and have u done any cids yet???

darnold

HT, just curious, I know that us P51 guys have found that after about 20-30 runs the motors often slow up, is your motor in the P51 fairly fresh? I'm just wondering if a fresh motor in the P51 would make a difference in your performance comparisons. I'm sure that the FW is more refined than the 51 and PZ has updated the P51 with a thicker 5mm wing which is the same thickness as the FW so if you got an earlier P51 then you might see some difference in the flight performance of the P51 compared to ones over the past 6 months or so.

FlyingGuy

My Feedback: (2)

My HZ P51 is definitely a bit slower than it was when it was new ... with maybe 20 flights on her. I'm having all sorts of problems with keeping the trailing edge of the wing locked into place in the fuse. Otherwise, a great plane, fast, and a handful for me at the intermediate level. But the more you fly her, the better the flying, of course. I run the stock NiMH and also use TP 3S 2100 LiPos. Now if Max Headspeed will get his FW up in the air, we'll really have some fun! I already cut off the tail of his HZ Super Cub last Saturday (with my SC). ... that was supposed to be formation flying ;-) Sorry Max!

MAX HEADSPEED

A metal prop on the front of my FW is heading toward your P51 sooner than you would like to think. Let the styrofoam confetti fly. YE HA!

darnold

FlyingGuy: Have you experienced any differences in flight characteristics between the FW and the P51?

For me I thought that the PZFW was a little slower in it's turn rate and overal speed compared to the PZ P51 but was more refined and easier to fly than the P51 (but all of this could have just been my imagination, LOL!). Have you or anyone else noticed anything like this or any other flight characteristic differences between the PZ P51 and the PZ FW190?

Of course if we are comparing a P51 with 20+ MORE flights than the FW has on it and or the P-51 is of the earlier versions with the 3mm wing (you can tell these if the center wing spar doesn't go all of the way across the wing) instead of the revised, stiffer version like the FW has then I could see were performance differences would be seen.

So I guess it would have to be a fairly new P51 vs. a fairly new FW or people would have to remember how their P51 performed new and try to compare that to what their FW is doing now (maybe a little tuff, but it can be done).

The interesting thing to me is that although the wings may be the same (althought they LOOK different in profile) and the thrust to weight ratio and Wing Loading are virtually the same; the wing and fuselage shapes along with the frontal areas are all different.

All of these affect aerodynamics I would think and they are different similar to how the real planes were different. Even the aileron surface area is larger on the FW190 than it is on the P-51 (FW's were renowned for their awesome roll rates).
Thus I would think that different characteristics would still pop up in these planes.

BTW Stats from FLY RC Magazine for these two planes:

Fly RC 8-05 has the P-51 at: 28.3-29oz., WA:269sq/in., WL: 15.1-15.5oz/sq.ft.

------- TO --------

Fly RC 6-06 has the FW190 at: 27.5-28.2oz., WA:263sq/in., WL: 15.1-15.4oz/sq.ft.

gunracer

i think the fw190's airframe is a bit more draggy probably due to the big round cowl...the fw190's airfoil being less symetrical than the p51's makes the fw190 more stable in flight...

darnold

Thanks Gunracer. So it wasn't just me, there really is a difference in the wing profile and there is greater frontal area on the FW than the 51 so drag does become a little more pronounced. Also, and this is just a funny thing but it seems like the thickest part of the wing on the PZ P51 is closer toward the middle of the airfoil compared to the PZ FW190. If this is the case then PZ did an even greater job at recreating these planes because that difference in the wing would mirror the difference that the full size planes had. As I am sure most know, the "laminar" wing on the P51 was because it had it thickest part toward the middle of the wing instead of the more common leading edge. Thus the air was less disturbed initially and would create less drag and thus would give more speed. Hmmmm, I wonder if PZ has done some of this in replicating these two fine planes or it's just my imagination????? Either way you noticed similar flight characteristics that I have noticed which is to say that the P51 is a little faster and a little more responsive (twitchier) than the FW, does it turn a little better??? On that I'm still unsure but it does seem to have a faster turn rate (which of course is different from turn radius).